As propagated, recently enacted criminal laws, Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, Bharatiy Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita and Bharatiya Sakshya Adhinayam replacing more than a century old Indian Penal Code, Code of Criminal Procedure and Indian Evidence Act are notified to be effective from 1st July 2024 by the Central Govt. By this time several criticisms have come in public domain. Several distinguished Jurists have also raised voice and appealed the Govt. to keep them on hold. Despite all these the Central Govt. is determined to implement the laws.
Due to this, the legal system in the country governing the feild of rule of law and litigation will be divided into two. According to Indian Constitution, penal laws cannot have retrospective effect. In respect of proceedures of penal law, if there is any negetive impact to the accused, retrospertive effect is not possible. Therefore the fact remains that the existance of two legal system will take decades to settle disputes arising out of interpretation of several provisions. And the pendency of the cases in various courts will be galloped.
All the replaced laws are in existence in our country for more than a century. The laws which were in existence before coming into force of Constitution in 1950 have been survived by the constitutional provision on the ground that pre-constitutional Iaws which take away or abridges anyone of the provisions in the law of fundamental rights cannot be survived. For the last several decades this exercise has continuously been exercised by various High Courts and even by the Supreme Court. That is why the replacing laws were survived. This being the situation what are the urgent need for replacing these laws?
The Supreme Court has held that First Information Report must be registered by the police if a cognizable offence is disclosed except in the case of mala fide intention of the complainant or in the case of rivalry of a commercial transaction. Now the police is given power to conduct enquiry before registering FIR in case of commission of cognizable offence so that police can be influenced. The provisions with regard to sedition are to be redefined so as to treat peoples lawful agitations are not seen against the sovereignty of the nation. The draconian provisions of UAPA is included in the new penal law. The result is that the trial by NIA and local police has to be faced. It has been alleged that there are several provisions which violate fundamental rights of the people particularly right of freedom of expression and for protection of life and liberty. Capital punishment is not only retained but extended to new areas. More than 100 countries including UK have droped capital punishment.As propagated, recently enacted criminal laws, Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, Bharatiy Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita and Bharatiya Sakshya Adhinayam replacing more than a century old Indian Penal Code, Code of Criminal Procedure and Indian Evidence Act are notified to be effective from 1st July 2024 by the Central Govt. By this time several criticisms have come in public domain. Several distinguished Jurists have also raised voice and appealed the Govt. to keep them on hold. Despite all these the Central Govt. is determined to implement the laws.
Due to this, the legal system in the country governing the feild of rule of law and litigation will be divided into two. According to Indian Constitution, penal laws cannot have retrospective effect. In respect of proceedures of penal law, if there is any negetive impact to the accused, retrospective effect is not possible. Therefore the fact remains that the existence of two legal system will take decades to settle disputes arising out of interpretation of several provisions. And the pendency of the cases in various courts will be galloped.
All the replaced laws are in existence in our country for more than a century. The laws which were in existence before coming into force of Constitution in 1950 have been survived by the constitutional provision on the ground that pre-constitutional Iaws which take away or abridges anyone of the provisions in the law of fundamental rights cannot be survived. For the last several decades this exercise has continuously been exercised by various High Courts and even by the Supreme Court. That is why the replacing laws were survived. This being the situation what are the urgent need for replacing these laws?
The Supreme Court has held that First Information Report must be registered by the police if a cognizable offence is disclosed except in the case of mala fide intention of the complainant or in the case of rivalry of a commercial transaction. Now the police is given power to conduct enquiry before registering FIR in case of commission of cognizable offence so that police can be influenced. The provisions with regard to sedition are to be redefined so as to treat peoples lawful agitations are not seen not against the sovereignty of the nation. The draconian provisions of UAPA is included in the new penal law. The result is that the trial by NIA and local police has to be faced. It has been alleged that there are several provisions which violate fundamental rights of the people particularly right of freedom of expression and for protection of life and liberty. Capital punishment is not only retained but extended to new area .In the world more than 100 countries including UK have droped capital punishment. It is also a concern of UN that capital punishment must be avoided. Yet Modi is having least regard to human rights values.
It is claimed that colonial enacted laws are to be replaced for a national litigation policy. What is the litigation policy sought to be achieved is not made known. The so called Litigation Policy must be made known to the public and enabling the public to debate on it. A legal system which is in vogue for more than a century is taken away with out a meaningful debate even in the parliament. Congress General Secretary Mr. Jayaram Ramesh had to say that they were bulldozed through aided by deliberate suspension of 146 INDIA bloc MPs.
The question arises whether the INDIA bloc will move a bill to repeal the three laws? It is also a concern of UN that capital punishment must be avoided. Yet Modi is having least regard to human rights values.
It is claimed that colonial-enacted laws are to be replaced for a national litigation policy. What is the litigation policy sought to be achieved is not made known. The so called litigation Policy must be made known to the public and enabling the public to debate on it. A legal system which is in vogue for more than a century is taken away with out a meaningful debate even in the parliament. Congress General Secretary Mr. Jayaram Ramesh had to say that they were bulldozed through aided by deliberate suspension of 146 INDIA bloc MPs.
The question arises whether the INDIA bloc will move a bill to repeal the three laws?
